In other words, the Court ruled that evidence of informed consent is irrelevant in a medical malpractice case in which there is no allegations presented specifically with respect to informed consent.
The rationale is that the simple fact that a patient was aware of the risks of the treatment prior to agreeing to undergo the same is not a defense against a medical provider's allegedly negligent conduct.
This case can be read online HERE.
I send thanks to Attorney Scott Cooper of the Harrisburg, PA office of Schmidt Kramer for bringing this case to my attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.